The role of fluency in a mathematics item with an embedded graphic: interpreting a pie chart

The purpose of this study was to identify the pedagogical knowledge relevant to the successful completion of a pie chart item. This purpose was achieved through the identification of the essential fluencies that 12–13-year-olds required for the successful solution of a pie chart item. Fluency relates to ease of solution and is particularly important in mathematics because it impacts on performance. Although the majority of students were successful on this multiple choice item, there was considerable divergence in the strategies they employed. Approximately two-thirds of the students employed efficient multiplicative strategies, which recognised and capitalised on the pie chart as a proportional representation. In contrast, the remaining one-third of students used a less efficient additive strategy that failed to capitalise on the representation of the pie chart. The results of our investigation of students’ performance on the pie chart item during individual interviews revealed that five distinct fluencies were involved in the solution process: conceptual (understanding the question), linguistic (keywords), retrieval (strategy selection), perceptual (orientation of a segment of the pie chart) and graphical (recognising the pie chart as a proportional representation). In addition, some students exhibited mild disfluencies corresponding to the five fluencies identified above. Three major outcomes emerged from the study. First, a model of knowledge of content and students for pie charts was developed. This model can be used to inform instruction about the pie chart and guide strategic support for students. Second, perceptual and graphical fluency were identified as two aspects of the curriculum, which should receive a greater emphasis in the primary years, due to their importance in interpreting pie charts. Finally, a working definition of fluency in mathematics was derived from students’ responses to the pie chart item.

[1]  Carmel M. Diezmann,et al.  Primary Students' Knowledge of and Errors on Number Lines , 2006 .

[2]  A. Frank Counting Skills--A Foundation for Early Mathematics. , 1989 .

[3]  Diane Shorrocks-Taylor,et al.  Measuring the Language Demands of Mathematics Tests: The case of the statutory tests for 11-year-olds in England and Wales , 2000 .

[4]  Lynn Arthur Steen,et al.  Why Numbers Count: Quantitative Literacy For Tomorrow's America , 1998 .

[5]  Michael O. Martin,et al.  IEA's TIMSS 2003 International Report on Achievement in the Mathematics Cognitive Domains: Findings from a Developmental Project. , 2005 .

[6]  T. Adams,et al.  Reading Mathematics: More Than Words Can Say. , 2003 .

[7]  Robert L. Harris,et al.  Information Graphics: A Comprehensive Illustrated Reference , 1996 .

[8]  Preliminaries to any Theory of Representation , 2008 .

[9]  D. Ball,et al.  Unpacking Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Conceptualizing and Measuring Teachers' Topic-Specific Knowledge of Students , 2008, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education.

[10]  Claude Janvier Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics , 1987 .

[11]  Stefan M. Herzog,et al.  Fluency heuristic: a model of how the mind exploits a by-product of information retrieval. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[12]  Martial Van der Linden,et al.  Mere exposure effect: A consequence of direct and indirect fluency–preference links , 2006, Consciousness and Cognition.

[13]  Wendy Van de Kerckhove,et al.  Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003. Nonresponse Bias Analysis. Technical Report. NCES 2007-044. , 2006 .

[14]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer The secret life of fluency , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  T. P. Carpenter,et al.  Cognitively Guided Instruction: A Knowledge Base for Reform in Primary Mathematics Instruction , 1996, The Elementary School Journal.

[16]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  EFFICIENCY AND INNOVATION IN TRANSFER , 2005 .

[17]  Merlyn J. Behr,et al.  Representations and translations among representations in mathematics learning and problem solving , 1987 .

[18]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Toward a Model of Learning Data Representations , 2001 .

[19]  Jock D. Mackinlay,et al.  Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information , 1986, TOGS.

[20]  L. Shulman Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching , 1986 .

[21]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Readings in information visualization - using vision to think , 1999 .

[22]  A. W. Blöte,et al.  Students' flexibility in solving two-digit addition and subtraction problems : Instruction effects , 2001 .

[23]  Dana L. Kelly,et al.  International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement , 1998 .